The Turner Prize 2024

It’s what I would expect from chrismac. Utter rubbish …….and noise

if the artist didn’t provide the explaination who would ever work out what a parked car with a big doily on it was supposed to be about

To be fair that much seemed obvious at first glance,   And while that’s a bit of a centerpiece to the exhibit, it makes more sense in the wider context of the other pieces exploring the idea that history is often written by a very mainstream narrative.  The point as I saw it was that “1980’s” conjures up images of the “Wolf of Wall Street” type excess and shoulder pads.  But if you’re from Nottingham it was probably miners strikes, or from Cumbria it was the restrictions on sheep farming after Chernobyl.  There’s also something about the sentimentality of it I think.  It’s not a million pound Ferrari in an air conditioned cocoon it’s a Ford under a doily.  I was visiting my nan in her new care home last week and it struck me how a lifetime of visiting her and grandads big detached house full of mid century G-plan furniture and doilies under everything to protect it was now condensed to a single room and only so few personal items you could fit them all in an archive box, a lot of the material things they may have cared about and protected are ultimately now gone forever.*  So to me it resonated not just that peoples history deserves to be recorded, but how we should go about protecting that.

*not the G-plan sideboard, that I think was snapped up by a hipster furniture dealer from London

Demographic that potentially spent a lot of it’s formative years having to act to hide themselves turns out to be good at acting?

Demographic that celebrates diversity turns out to be better at producing new creative expressions?

Demographic that had to stick it’s head above the parapet of society and deal with comments like yours turns out to also be more inclined to then throw other ideas out there and push things forward?

I’m really not sure why you’re at all upset, but I’m not surprised.

I think you’re being hasty in your judgement.

I’m quite liberally minded myself and I also work in an industry where working class white men are killing themselves at a disproportionate rate, so maybe that’s why I’m quite sensitive to these kind of things.

While I recognise that support of disadvantaged women and ethnic minorities probably comes from a good place and is a good thing for society in general, I think it’s about time we stopped pretending that white men can’t also be disadvantaged in modern Britain.

I don’t really buy any of those reasons you’ve given to be honest. Especially not the second one which seems to imply that white men don’t celebrate diversity, which is definitely not the case. I’d be surprised if you could find any evidence that a particular non-age based demographic celebrates diversity any more than any others.

You only have to look at the music scene to see that white men are capable of and interested in pursuing artistic careers with just as much enthusiasm and talent as any other demographic.

 I think it’s about time we stopped pretending that white men can’t also be disadvantaged in modern Britain.

Give one example

Are people really struggling to see why queer people might be drawn to education and industries that have been traditionally more accepting of them in the past? Where they can mix with like minded people, rather than be treated as interlopers?

OK, you can ready your flamethrowers…I’ll admit it, I genuinely don’t get the meaning of an awful lot of art. Maybe it’s the way my brain is wired, or maybe I’m just a dullard (possibly even both), but I don’t. There, I said it.

This Turner Prize piece of art, without any additional explanation, looks to me simply like a car with a doily on it. Nothing more. I see no hidden, implied or suggested context, just a car with a doily on it.

I can look at a picture, a painting, a sculpture etc and think “that’s nice” or, maybe contentiously, “that’s a bit naff”, but this is only to my eye. I can appreciate the effort that may have gone into creating a piece of art, but not necessarily ‘get it’, or even like it.

I recall arguing, loose description, about the merits of a guitar solo in a piece of music I’d listened to, with a mate who was a good guitar player. They mocked my lack of appreciation of the technicality and skill required to play certain other solos they mentioned, whereas I thought they sounded awful. I could still appreciate that there was skill and technique, without liking those bits of music, whereas the one I’d mentioned just sounded ‘good/nice’ to my ear.

I’d barely give this artwork a glance on my way to visiting the Rothko’s in the Tate Modern.

This Turner Prize piece of art, without any additional explanation, looks to me simply like a car with a doily on it. Nothing more. I see no hidden, implied or suggested context, just a car with a doily on it.

The prize is IIRC for the whole exhibit.

I’d agree that without the context of the exhibit then the individual pieces make no sense, it’s just a piece of crochet craft / skill.

There’s plenty of people on Fiver and Etsy who can produce a photorealistic drawing for you, it’s a skill though, not nesecerily art?

I recall arguing, loose description, about the merits of a guitar solo in a piece of music I’d listened to, with a mate who was a good guitar player. They mocked my lack of appreciation of the technicality and skill required to play certain other solos they mentioned, whereas I thought they sounded awful. I could still appreciate that there was skill and technique, without liking those bits of music, whereas the one I’d mentioned just sounded ‘good/nice’ to my ear.

Again craftwork Vs art?

There might be songs that make you want to cry, or songs that make you want to throw Molotov cocktails, but written on a piece of paper make rubbish poems.  Similarly the instrumental on it’s own might be technically brilliant but of little artistic merit.  Some musicians can make you emotional with badly written poetry and 3 chords, Groillaz wrote Clint Eastwood over a Casiotone preset, and Grohl famously copied disco drum beats for Nirvana, you can have art without “skill”.

Aesop Rock raps with twice the vocabulary Shakespeare used, and Santana or Slash could be considered virtuoso guitarists, that’s art and skill.

Then there’s cover bands and never made it’s that might be technically brilliant but can’t produce something considered art.

Give one example

Your own posts in this thread, which in trying to justify why no straight white male has won the turner prize in over a decade, have appealed to disadvantages experienced by other demographics, implying you believe no such disadvantages are experienced by white males. Or else, what was the point in raising those disadvantages in the first place, if not to distinguish those other demographics from white males?

I quite the way the Turner Prize provokes debate, it seems this kind of art is about being interested enough to listen or ask questions. If I put a lacy cloth on my car for no reason it’s not art as such. If it’s done as a expression of something and it can be justified or reasoned, it becomes art.

Art isn’t the same as graphic design for advertising. Thinking we should be able to understand the aim of all/most art is arrogant, it’d be like saying that we have the ideas and creativity of that many people whose life is about art and creativity? A lot of the time it will confuse us or not make sense at first and kicking back against that is the natural reaction for some.

If I put a lacy cloth on my car for no reason it’s not art as such. 

Yes, to get to a position where you can put a doily on a car, or duct tape a banana to a wall, and have people discuss it as art – that’s where the skill and graft and hard work and sacrifice of being an artist comes in.

Your own posts in this thread, which in trying to justify why no straight white male has won the turner prize in over a decade, have appealed to disadvantages experienced by other demographics, implying you believe no such disadvantages are experienced by white males. Or else, what was the point in raising those disadvantages in the first place, if not to distinguish those other demographics from white males?

They were deliberately slightly facetious and hypothesis rather than facts proven by data, but anyway.

Where you seem to have taken those points and run away with them is that straight white men should be given greater acting plaudits because in everyday life we’re the demographic that least has to put on an act (point 1) and fits in naturally (point 3)?  Point number 2 needs a wider view to observe the nuance that as you said you individually believe yourself to be “quite liberally minded”, but as a collective spectacularly fail at it. Everything from the question of why does no one watch women’s sport, to why do school syllabuses cover Jane Austen but not contemporary events to her like the Irish Famine and the British Empire was routinely executing people by strapping them to canons*.  Somehow we generally have the power and agency, but nothing changes.

*credit for that point goes to Fiona Shaw

Does the prize fund even cover an escort of that age these days?

I’d barely give this artwork a glance on my way to visiting the Rothko’s in the Tate Modern.

I’d give it more than that, but a great many people would walk past the Rothko’s and not even look at them! My mate would sit for ages looking at the Seagram Murals, while I just didn’t understand what the appeal was. It took a major exhibition of his work and a detailed almost forensic examination of the Seagram Murals for me to really understand what he saw. He’s particularly sensitive to UV light, and the Seagram paintings are very cleverly layered, with multiple different colours many that are fluorescent under UV light.

FWIW, I Love Rothko’s more colourful pieces, but I’m sure many would just shrug.

That’s the thing with art, it’s beauty is always in the eye of the beholder, and often it’s pointless trying to explain something to someone who just shrugs and says ‘so’…?

That’s the thing with art, it’s beauty is always in the eye of the beholder, and often it’s pointless trying to explain something to someone who just shrugs and says ‘so’…?

Exactly. If you don’t like the sort of art that the Turner prize awards then move on and appreciate other types, forms of art or none at all if that is you. But claiming it is not art just because you don’t appreciate it is just ignorant.

The black arch trims (non colour coded RS turbo kit?) make the car look weird. Those softline RS wheels are worth good money though! I also dont get it, but then when I visited Tate Liverpool I thought that was mostly bollocks too 🙂

I also dont get it, but then when I visited Tate Liverpool I thought that was mostly bollocks too

I suppose at least you went to see it and then decided it is not for you. Maybe the National Gallery may be more to your liking or maybe no gallery at all, you don’t have to appreciate art.

There a nothing wrong with not liking certain art, in a way it’s essential. We come to understand our own tastes by sifting through what we do like and what we don’t like. Think about your own musical tastes and how you formed them over the years.

I have followed the Turner Prize and visited many of the annual exhibitions since the early 90’s but have become increasingly disinterested over the last 5 or 10 years. I have no problem with going to an exhibit and not liking what I’m seeing (See my comments above) but recent exhibitions have been presented within a moral framework to such an extent that if you don’t like what you see it makes you a bad person.

It’s not only the Turner Prize, practically every public gallery and museum operates under the same mandate. I recently went to the three major galleries in Manchester and across 8 exhibitions all but one were focused on some form of moral instruction or social engineering, (the excheptin being an exhibit of Durer prints from half a milenia ago relegated to the back room of the Whitworth Museum).

I go to galleries to be entertained, amused and inspired, not to be educated but unfortunately that’s what the current administrations of all the institutions see their role as, using the agency of art to make us a better society and that’s not just my critique, they will proudly tell you so before even being asked.

Its called behaviouralim, Historicaĺy speaking, the only examples of this happening in the arts was under the regimes of Hitler, Stalin and Chairman Mao but feel free to correct me if you can think of any examples that contradict this observation.

Interestingly, when Mussolini came to power it was requested of him that he tear down the old art academies and begin anew in the revolutionary spirit of fascism. Mussolini responded; ” It is not the role of governments to tell artists what to do, their role is only to support and encourage”.

By that metric, can we say the the current governance of our arts institutions is more fascisistic than Mussolini?

By that metric, can we say the the current governance of our arts institutions is more fascisistic than Mussolini?

No?

<I>Fascism (/ˈfæʃɪzəm/ FASH-iz-əm) is a far-right, authoritarian, and ultranationalist political ideology and movement,[1][2][3] characterized by a dictatorial leader, centralized autocracy, militarism, forcible suppression of opposition, belief in a natural social hierarchy, subordination of individual interests for the perceived good of the nation or race, and strong regimentation of society and the economy.[2][3]</I>

far right – nope

authoritarian – only to the extent they patronize some artists over others, there’s no enforcement of this perceived moral judgement

ultranationalist – nope

political ideology – a stretch, morals and political ideology inevitably get intertwined and history judges them as right and wrong or good and evil by future standards,

dictatorial leader – back to the authoritarian point, it’s not really dictatorial to support one side, they’re not burning the artwork of straight, white, Israeli or middle-class artists, it’s just that those groups aren’t really the story people want to tell because they’re stories that dominate every other aspect of life.  There’s plenty of very successful art from straight  / white / middle class demographics, Coldplay make more money in the opening chords of a show than the turner prize fund, so it seems right that public funds support other things.

centralized autocracy, – no idea of that describes the arts council or not

militarism, – not generally, although protests do drive good art IMO

forcible suppression of opposition – again, it’s usually the art being burnt not the artists burning things.

belief in a natural social hierarchy, – quite the opposite

subordination of individual interests for the perceived good of the nation or race, – TBH I quite support that one as a statement, as long as it’s towards a liberte egalite fraternite end of things rather than the alternative

and strong regimentation of society and the economy  – they always seem to come from an anarchistic fringe

They were deliberately slightly facetious and hypothesis rather than facts proven by data, but anyway.

Or in other words completely made up statements with no evidence to support them

Point number 2 needs a wider view to observe the nuance that as you said you individually believe yourself to be “quite liberally minded”, but as a collective spectacularly fail at it

What does that even mean and where is the evidence to support the statement that as a collective spectacularly fail at. Or is that another of your slightly facetious hypothesis that can’t be evidenced?

forcible suppression of opposition

except on here if you dare to voice an opinion that doesn’t aline to the group think of this message board and dare to not follow the echo chambers view

What does that even mean and where is the evidence to support the statement that as a collective spectacularly fail at. Or is that another of your slightly facetious hypothesis that can’t be evidenced?

There are 9 women CEO’s in the FTSE100, the FTSE250 is even worse with only 21. The gender pay gap is 8%.  1.3% of rape allegations even make it as far as a charge.  Two-thirds (64%) of LGBTQ+ people had experienced anti-LGBT+ violence or abuse.  Society spectacularly rewards straight white men with advantages just for being straight white men. And yet;

roli caseFree Member
I feel like having a moan that it’s been 11 years since the last straight white male winner,

Or in other words completely made up statements with no evidence to support them

Hitchens Razor, if Roli is going to state that white men really are are the victims of prejudice without evidence then I’m under no obligation to provide him with it. Although I seem to have been sucked into this argument and just posted it.

Time will tell whether the Fordoilie has any lasting merit, give it 50 years or so. perhaps doilies will make a big comeback !!

Does the prize fund even cover an escort of that age these days?

I’m struggling to get past how wrong that question sounds.

😀

As so many have said, art is in the eye of the beholder.  Back in the day living in London one of the great advantages was being able to see a lot of art in big, small exhibitions and auction preshows.  Hard to predict what you like – I consistently like medieval art, old master, fauvists and abstract expressionists, which is a fair mix. but it pays if you see something you don’t really like, well, just walk on.  I looked at Constables etc a hundred times, but nothing for me there…

Looking at Turner entrants I liked Delaine Le Bas. I kind of like Claudette Johnsons work, but it’s not really firing me up. But it’s technically good, just… well—- who knows?

There are 9 women CEO’s in the FTSE100, the FTSE250 is even worse with only 21. The gender pay gap is 8%.  1.3% of rape allegations even make it as far as a charge.  Two-thirds (64%) of LGBTQ+ people had experienced anti-LGBT+ violence or abuse.

Classic whataboutery completely ignoring all the ‘positive discrimination’ that’s widespread in recruitment. Most of the job adverts I see will allow less experienced and qualified candidates if they are not white male. There won’t be anything like  a 50:50 split of ceos as it takes an entire career or get to the top so 20-30 years of working your way up the corporate greasy pole assuming that there are as many women want to do that as men.

I agree the rape statistic is appalling

Who would have thought an old car with a bit of crochet draped over it would prompt so much discussion? And not one comment about how rusty that car should be if it was period specific!!!

I suppose that’s ‘mission accomplished” as far as the artist is concerned? 😀

Makes you think…. 😉

It’s what I would expect from the turner prize. Utter rubbish designed to create media comment and noise rather than be good art. I have a simple theory when it comes to art. If the artist has to provide any form of explanation as to what the work is about or represents then it has failed as art. In this case if the artist didn’t provide the explaination who would ever work out what a parked car with a big doily on it was supposed to be about

I’m not often a huge fan of the Turner prize stuff, although I can see that actually works designed to create media comment and even invoke the hatred you seem to have, may in themselves, be good art just for making you discuss what art is!

The work is actually more than the car and the doily, not least because its an immersive sound experience – so maybe you should go see/hear it before you declare it shit?  It may be hard for anyone outside of the West of Scotland to really understand the cultural significance of Irn Bru, but it would be particularly poinant to the locals who attended the original exhibition at the Tramway in Glasgow, that got her shortlisted.  The car is just easy picture editor stuff that makes for lazy journalism.  Hey, maybe she knew that would be the case and that’s part of her “point”.  One of the things I like about the media representation of that piece which you won’t get in real life is that there is a “WTF” because of the scale of the two items.  At first glance is it a toy car with a doily or a real car with a giant doily?  Perhaps it resonated because I grew up not that far from Kaur, albeit a decade before – but the idea that it was a reference to Scottish/Sikh culture took really no explanation.  I do confess though to not having known that crochet doilies were a thing taken from Britain to India during colonial times and that their persistence within the Indian immigrant community after they had gone out of fashion with the local population was more significant than I had appreciated.  I like that I learned something from it.  I like that it made me think back to how immigrants in Glasgow were viewed and viewed their adopted country/culture.

Of the shortlist, Claudette Johnson’s work is more the sort of thing I’d actually want to spend a lot of time looking at, but the prize is supposed to be about new approaches in art, named after Turner who whilst rather old fashioned in today’s view was considered quite radical at the time.  Criticising turner nominees for being too far from traditional art is a bit like criticising pop music for not being orchestral.

“works designed to create media comment and even invoke the hatred you seem to have, “

See how quickly your comment describing something as ‘utter bollocks’ gets transcribed into ‘hate’

“I agree the rape statistic is appalling”

You shouldn’t have to agree, there is nothing in your comments that suggested you were in support of rape.

Coming on a thread about a contemporary art prize and complaining that it isn’t traditional art is asking for it somewhat but having to defend yourself from being a rape advocate and being low-key accused of hate speech rather confirms some of your other points…

My second thought was **** me, were we really driving cars that looked like that?

Yep. Both the Escort and Cortina went into a death spiral after the Mk2 versions.

See how quickly your comment describing something as ‘utter bollocks’ gets transcribed into ‘hate’

… and being low-key accused of hate speech rather confirms some of your other points…

WTF – it’s quite a leap to get from describing someone as having hatred of a piece of “art” to accusing them of hate speech.  That leap is entirely in your own head.

They is clearly some trolling attempts here on white male stuff but art is very simple – You like it or you don’t.
I don’t really need to know whether you dislike it and think it is shit, I just need to know if I like it and in the case of the the piece in question it is not for me but then I have never been into the conceptual end of art.

There are 9 women CEO’s in the FTSE100, the FTSE250 is even worse with only 21. The gender pay gap is 8%…  Society spectacularly rewards straight white men with advantages just for being straight white men. 

How many of those are working class and what is the working class pay gap?

There’s also a height pay gap and a baldness pay gap where taller people and men who don’t suffer male pattern baldness get paid more than shorter or bald men. Heaven forbid if you are bald, short and working class! You better make up for it with a solid modern RP accent.

All sorts of prejudice out there. I’m pleased that you care about some of them at least. But maybe you could try and recognise some of the others rather than cherry picking a handful concluding that all men are spectacularly advantaged, because that’s just not true at all.

They is clearly some trolling attempts here on white male stuff but art is very simple – You like it or you don’t.

Thats a bit simplistic. You might hate it, it might make you feel many emotions.

I quite like Gormleys statues* but i detest when he litters the environment with them. Its still art.

*The weird nipples disturb me though.

They is clearly some trolling attempts here on white male stuff but art is very simple – You like it or you don’t.

I’m not sure that art is there to be liked or disliked.  In my highly uneducated opinion art is there to convey a thought or an emotion without the use of conventional descriptive language.  I think good art evokes some kind of reaction.  Obviously more often than not this reaction is bafflement but that’s probably why people sit looking at art for so long.  They are observing their own feelings, thoughts, and general reactions to the piece.

That’s why it’s possible to appreciate a good piece of art but not want to have it anywhere in your house.

In my highly uneducated opinion art is there to convey a thought or an emotion without the use of conventional descriptive language

So the written word isn’t an artform?

So the written word isn’t an artform?

That’s why I said conventional descriptive language.

Most people wouldn’t say a newspaper article was art.  However, someone writing a story the purpose of which is to convey an idea without explaining it directly would be more likely to be described as an artist.

But obviously that line can get kind of blurry.  I’m not sure where Fear and Loathing on the Campaign Trail ’72 would fit in, for example.

This work actually reminded me of a conversation I had with a friend about 20 years ago.  We were talking about whether a car could be considered a work of art.  He persuaded me a car could never be art in itself since if it was to be considered a car there would certain limitations placed on the artist like it would have to be driveable (and probably have to pass the NCAP).

Kind of ironic given this year’s winner 🙂

Can we do a GoFundMe for all the bored  middle aged male artists on STW that never reached their potential despite putting in hard graft?

We were talking about whether a car could be considered a work of art.

That’s an intersting one… cars these days are all very similar looking due to demand for aero/fuel efficiency, so maybe not so much these days, as they all look pretty much like jelly moulds.  But before that was really a thing, deisgners had a lot more free reign to inject a bit of flar/creativity into the look…

I mean, they don’t make ’em lke this anymore!

That’s an intersting one… cars these days are all very similar looking due to demand for aero/fuel efficiency, so maybe not so much these days, as they all look pretty much like jelly moulds.

Yeah, but at the same time I don’t think anyone has ever built a car where people have looked at it and gone, ‘Is that a car, I’m not sure?’  Trying to make a car, you are still constrained by certain functional requirements which is why it can’t really be art.  If it went too far beyond that then it couldn’t really be classed as a car anymore.

There have been exceptions though:

https://s1.cdn.autoevolution.com/images/news/gallery/edd-china-drives-sofa-car-in-the-rain-believes-it-s-artistic_2.jpg